Taufmonster's Log

Pages

Monday, August 7, 2017

Originally I wrote most of this is a Google Doc and deleted it. I had seen a lot of thoughts and takes on the situation and didn't really want to inundate twitter with Yet Another Nick Robinson Take. However, as time has gone on I haven't seen some of the things that I had taken away from the situation echoed elsewhere.

Something that I've been trying to get a grasp on is what can I learn from this situation. Most importantly, are there ways that I could have sniffed that he was not as good of a person as I thought he was before this situation exploded. I've come around to two things that I should have picked up on.

First, Nick's public persona wasn't consistent. While in his videos and podcasts for Polygon he was generally a nice, funny person, he wasn't like that everywhere. Despite loving his videos he made for work, I only briefly followed him on twitter because he was kind of a nasty asshole. He was rude and sarcastic and I didn't like it. He wasn't a nice person there. At the time, I didn't take away from that experience that I should be wary of his general character. I didn't think that maybe he's not a nice person and just puts on a nice face for his work projects.

I feel like the conclusion is that a nice/good person is going to be generally nice/good in every context. Not 100% of the time (we all have bad days), but if there's a significant part of a person's interactions with other people where they aren't nice, that's a sign of something and shouldn't be ignored. A corollary to this is the Waiter Rule saying that you can tell a lot about a person's character based on how they treat waiters/waitresses. There are lots of versions of this rule, such as a person should pay good attention to how their significant other talks about their exes and I think I need to take better notice of such things.

(Something to add to the "Waiter Rule" section is that if a person is being abused/attacked/threatened in some way, they don't have to be nice in response necessarily. Those situations aren't normal circumstances, but the ways that a person responds or deals with the situation could speak volumes, such as those who bring up Donald Trump or Chris Christie's weight into every criticism or people who are popular on social media who sic their followers on any and all critics.)

Secondly, I follow (at least) one of the people who he harassed, and they had tweeted a criticism of the "soft boy" aesthetic, saying that it (the appearance of being a nice, harmless person) could be used to hide their bad behavior or protect themselves from accusations of bad behavior. At the time, in the fandoms/communities I was in, there were two people who came to mind as being "soft boys" and Nick was one of them. When I read that criticism, I took it as an abstract, theoretical critique and not as something that was grounded in their real world experience. While pinning that on Nick would be difficult, since there wouldn't have been much of a way to be sure who they were referring to, my failure to read the criticism as coming from a place of real experience was a failure on my part. These sorts of criticisms probably come from somewhere and I should have realized that.

Saturday, March 25, 2017

If you've played 2D platformers a fair amount, chances are you've come across an auto-scrolling level. In these levels, the window of the world that you are viewing on the screen moves at it's own speed, meaning you have limited time to make and act on your decisions. The goal of these levels is to ratchet up the pressure and make a more intense level and to add more challenge to a level that would otherwise be easy. These levels can either be great or terrible. I'd bet if you have a least favorite Mario level, it's an auto-scrolling level.

If you've put a lot of time into a particular Mario game, then chance are there are levels where you can enter into a state of flow, where all you have to do is run forward and you're able to time your jumps to weave your way through strings of coins, avoid hazards, and bounce of the head of enemies. Achieving this is one of the most enjoyable experience that I've had playing games, and if you've experienced it I'm sure you'll agree. It's the same goal that speedrunner look for, uninterrupted forward momentum.

Super Mario Run's design is closer to the former, but manages to achieve the feeling of the latter.

If you're not familiar, in Super Mario Run Mario is always running and you can only control when Mario jumps. There is nuance to the control, pressing your screen for longer will allow him to jump higher, and tapping again while in midair makes him do a spin that halts his descent and extends the jump. You can also jump off of walls.

This, combined with some other mechanics, allows Mario to elegantly chain bounce off of enemies, through strings of coins, and achieve that desired that of flow relatively easily. Super Mario Run gives you the thing that you've wanted from Mario games without asking for the hours of dedication that others have asked for before. Add to this the 3 difficulty levels of coin hunts as optional objectives for each level and you've got a game with depth enough that's kept me playing it pretty near constantly since it came out for Android three days ago.

While many people have really liked Super Mario Run, some are frustrated that it's not a traditional Mario experience (they do acknowledge that they understand why it can't be a traditional Mario game), but I've particularly enjoyed it because it's NOT a traditional 2D Mario game. Frankly, if I want to play a traditional Mario game, there's tons of them to choose from, even some I haven't played. Super Mario Run has offered me something new, which if they were to offer to me again for some of the stages in the next 2D Mario game, I'd be excited.

P.S. There are other feature in the game, such as the Toad Rally and the Kingdom Builder. These aren't very exciting or interesting and feel like designs from a period when they may have been flirting with a more micro-transaction oriented revenue model. However, their existence doesn't detract from the main gameplay experience, except when the tutorial takes your time to explain them to you.

Friday, March 17, 2017

I awoke in a strange tomb, filled with machines that were alien to me. A voice that I didn't recognize and whose source I couldn't identify begged me forward. I exited the tomb to find a world that was not only alien to me, but ruined and hostile. This world I was tasked with saving, and save that world I did. Along the way I helped people out in small ways, finding ingredient for their cooking or taking pictures for them, and in big ways, stopping beasts that threatened their homes or saving them from attacking creatures, and I recovered my memories along the way.

It had been 100 years since the times that I remembered, and all but a few that I cared about were long dead. I stopped my training and preparations short to finish the mission by destroying Ganon and saving Princess Zelda. Afterwards I went back out into the land I now remembered was known as Hyrule to continue finding the ancient shrines that granted me strength and to continue doing what I knew how to do, help people. I helped a man build a town from nothing and find a wife. I showed weapons to a child who had heard about them from his now gone grandfather and who desperately wanted to see them himself. I helped so many people it became hard to find more people who needed help. I found some men tearing down an abandoned house down and bought it for myself. I invested in that house, made it nice, made it my own. I settled down. Hyrule is safe, I hope.

I finished Breath of the Wild this week for the most part. I beat the game, all the shrines, and the side quests. I still have some unupgraded armor and some side tasks that aren't tracked that I haven't done, but I've done the things that I really care about. Truth be told I don't have a lot of experience with open world games. Prior to BotW I guess you could say the last ones I played was Metal Gear Solid V and Shadow of Mordor though Grand Theft Auto: Vice City is more similar to BotW. I'd say that the closest experience that I've had to Breath of the Wild would be World of Warcraft. They both really capture a feeling of exploration, especially during the my early time playing the WoW in the base game and its Burning Crusade and Wrath of the Lich King expansions.

The Legend of Zelda series of games is one that's near and dear to my heart. If you take the original game's release date of Feb 21, 1986 and do the time conversion to American Central Time, my birth was only a handful of hours off. Like Link, I'm also left-handed (though that's changed for Link since motion controls) and I have pointy ears. I saw people play the first two Zelda games but the first one I really got to dig into and beat for myself was A Link to the Past. I've been hooked ever since and now that I have Breath of the Wild done, all I need to do is wrap up my playthrough of Majora's Mask and I'll have completed every canonical Legend of Zelda game, console and handheld.

Running out of significant things to do in Breath of the Wild has been bittersweet. I've loved the game immensely and I've been glad to do everything that I've done and am sad to have run out of major things to do. If the game would let me I'd gladly cross the great canyon that separates Hyrule from the rest of the world to the north and west or drive a sand seal through the Gerudo Desert to parts unknown.

It was so amazing to play a game, not just a Zelda game, that pushes you out into the world and says "Go where you want. Here's your goals, but I'm not going to stop you from doing what you want to do." There are entire zones that aren't necessary to any of the main quests. This is very different from the previous entry Skyward Sword which was very structured/linear. Like many people I enjoyed Skyward Sword but I didn't finish it until a year or more later because I just wasn't drawn to it. I've been consumed by Breath of the Wild for the past week and a half and I really think that's because it's really earned being called an adventure game. You quest and explore and are HEROIC. It's truly amazing to not know exactly how to get somewhere or what you'll encounter along the way.

One of the recurring complaints about Breath of the Wild has been w/ the durability system they added for weapons and shields. While it is frustrating for a great piece of gear to break, it creates a tension and adds a layer of strategy to the battles that I really enjoy. It adds value and strategy by forcing you to consider what weapon you want to use against a particular enemy and making you make sure you have a good spread of weapons for the enemies that you're encountering. Finally breaking out the weapon you've been saving for a special occasion or an enemy that's just pissed you off is incredibly satisfying. All they really needed was a nicer UI for dropping/exchanging items.

The oddest thing is that I don't know if I'd want a Breath of the Wild 2. The Zelda games generally have the same rough story/map, it'd be too much if they had the same gameplay as well. For a mechanical successor to BotW to succeed it's going to need to take place somewhere new or have a different story archetype. Even if there's never another Zelda that I love as much as Breath of the Wild I'll still be incredibly happy. They've done something incredibly magical with it that was the Zelda game that I wasn't even aware was the one I've always wanted.

Wednesday, November 9, 2016

This post isn't so much about getting people to read my words as much as it is about me having things that I need to say. Needless to say that I'm very upset. I'm upset that this rhetoric worked. I'm upset at what this means about the next 4 years for our country.

Be kind. Stay safe. Take care of yourself. I love you all.

I'm not really interested in having a conversation about which group is to blame for this elections or how people should have seen this coming.

I worry that our reliance on polling and other things to predict the outcome of the election before it even happens is too much. I worry that maybe some people got complacent and didn't vote. I think the failure wasn't so much in the polling but rather in how much of each demographic group was expected to turn up, and that Trump supporters mobilized far more than they were expected to. I was worried for this whole election that the existing models wouldn't work for this election and it seem like my worry was correct, and I'm not happy about it.

I believe in a country that is Of the people, By the people, and For the people. I don't believe that such a government will be perfect because people are not perfect, but I have more faith in it than the alternatives. It's not perfect because there is an implied part of that statement that wasn't written down when this country was being formed that won out yesterday, that some people weren't and aren't considered to be people enough to have their votes valued. But as much as I hate republicans for voter suppression, I don't have much faith that democrats wouldn't try to suppress votes if they felt it would be good for them.

I believe that it is of the utmost importance that everybody vote and that the system we use to vote is incredibly important. I feel like the symptoms of a bad voting system are voter turnout and tactical voting. Everyone should vote and everyone should vote for who aligns the most with their views. Not only do we need to eliminate voter suppression and make voting more accessible for people, we need to make sure that people feel incentivized to vote.

A lot has been said and will continue to be said about the Electoral College. As of right now, it values votes in different states differently, because of how the number of votes in each state is calculated. It also causes candidates to value states differently, because they feel that some states are locked up for a particular party. Many people make choices about whether or not they can vote for a third party based on how "safe" they feel their state is and many people don't turn out to vote because they think that voting in their state is meaningless (that it is "safe" or "locked up" depending upon your perspective), and that's incredibly fucked up and sad. I'm not a fan of Nebraska and Maine's systems either, where there are districts that vote individually because it opens things up to gerrymandering.

But above that, I believe that only being able to vote for one candidate is bad. It leads to a two-party system by discouraging people from voting for third parties and encouraging people to vote for a "viable" candidate. This means that people aren't able to accurately express their political views. The Center for Election Science advocates strongly for a move to approval voting, where you select all the candidates you would "approve" of winning and each one receives a vote. In this way you can vote for your niche candidate who is closest to your personal view point but you can also vote for a "viable" candidate. I'm also a fan of single-transferable voting, where you rank as many candidates as you want to and your ballot initially is counted for who you ranked as number 1, and then once the votes are in the least popular candidate is eliminated and all votes for them are transferred the the next ranked candidate on the ballot. This elimination and transfer process is repeated until a winner (>50% of remaining ballots) emerges.

Tuesday, November 10, 2015

I was originally thinking about telling the story of each of our games of Pandemic Legacy, but I don't have the skill or the attention span to see that through. So I think this will be the only post.
Sarah and I started playing the board game Pandemic Legacy recently. It takes the game of Pandemic where you work as a team of doctors and researchers trying to cure the world of four diseases and turns it into a multi-game campaign where events that transpire in one game will affect what happens in the sebsequent game. You rip up cards, place stickers on the board, and open up secret compartments as the games go on.

One of the cool things that the game asks you to do is to take a pen and write the name of each disease on the board. After careful consideration, these were the names we picked. I also came up with a bit of backstory for each of them.

"Robo Fever" (Red)
"Robo fever" is the nickname for a new disease that has sprung up in east Asia after cybernetic implants became commonplace in the region for practical reason and fashion reasons. It is currently suspected that the bacteria feed off of the synthetic compounds in the implants but require the acidic environment of the human gut to reproduce. Technically the name "Robo Fever" is a misnomer since those affected should be classified as cyborgs at most and not as robots. While the CDC isn't particularly concerned about the effect this will have on those with vanity implants/enhancements, there is significant concern for the effect this disease will have on those with medical implants and prosthetics.

Affluenza (Blue)
It doesn't always pay to be an early adopter. Although this flu variety has since made it to the general population, it started showing up among wealthy people and tech workers in San Francisco. Investigations have tied it back to early adopters of the Ploylent Meal Substitute that went on market several months ago. It's hypothesized that someone at Ploylent's manufacturer had a mutated form of the flu and got it in the supply. The innovative packaging meant to preserve the substitute during transport also managed to keep the flu alive during transport.

Although it's different from typical flu varieties, existing flu research has greatly aided in finding a vaccine and effective treatments.Gakarrhea (Yellow)
This disease causes frequent, diarrhea-like bowel movements. It earned its name because the consistency of those bowel movements was "slimy" and green and resembled Nickelodeon's "Gak" from the 90s. Although diarrhea is symptom and not a disease, the name Gakarrhea has stuck since it's a trademark sign of this particular disease and came about before the disease had been isolated and understood.

"Pluto Pox" (Black)
The world was rocked when a nuclear explosion detonated in Afghanistan that appeared to target a terrorist stronghold in the area. Naturally, America was blamed for the attack. America disavowed involvement in the attack and cast suspicion on Russia. After the explosion a new disease showed up in the area, which wasn't similar to anything seen in the aftermath of a previous nuclear bombing. It's marked by pockmarks that always appear in pairs, resembling Pluto and its moon Charon. Researchers believe that the radiation from the blast mutated some pre-existing disease and are currently hoping that will help them develop a cure.

Some of those afflicted with the disease believe that it has made them immune to the effects of the radiation and are attempting to settle in regions that are still considered dangerous. Research has not backed up this claim.

Monday, February 2, 2015

Recently we have been playing Pandemic: The Cure. The goal of the game is (loosely) to cure all the diseases. Each player has a certain number of dice that they roll on their turn (5 for most players, 7 if you're the Generalist) that give them their possible actions for the turn. One of the actions lets you use one of your die to "bottle up" a disease die and at the end of your turn you roll your bottled up disease dice and if the total amount rolled on the dice for a particular color of disease is greater than 13, then you have cured that disease.

Bottling up the diseases is great because it removes that disease die from play and helps you discover the cure, but until you discover the cure that die of yours you used to "bottle" it up is locked up and you can't use it, meaning you'll have fewer possible actions on your turn, making you less effective until the cure is discovered.

Disease Dice

Each color of disease die has different face values from the other colors'. Each one has a "Cross" face (value 0) and 5 other values. The average value of the faces on each die is 3 but since the values are different the standard deviations of the values on the dice are different. The values on the faces of the dice are as follows.

Value

Black

Yellow

Blue

Red

1st

0

0

0

0

2nd

3

2

1

1

3rd

3

2

2

1

4th

3

4

3

4

5th

4

5

6

6

6th

5

5

6

6

Avg

3

3

3

3

Std Dev

1.67

2

2.53

2.68

So in terms of trying to cure the diseases, the likelihood that the total of the values across all the dice you roll of a color will meet the required sum is different. Below is a table of probabilities of curing the disease with various numbers of a color of dice. The amount needed to cure a disease is normally 13, but sometimes can be 11.

Black

Yellow

Blue

Red

# Dice

11+

13+

11+

P13+

11+

13+

11+

13+

2

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

11.11%

0.00%

11.11%

0.00%

3

32.87%

7.41%

34.72%

12.04%

34.26%

20.37%

40.28%

23.15%

4

70.14%

46.91%

67.67%

45.76%

60.88%

45.06%

62.73%

45.76%

5

89.51%

77.22%

86.52%

73.53%

79.90%

67.30%

78.29%

67.36%

6

96.81%

91.85%

95.03%

88.94%

90.71%

82.81%

88.70%

82.04%

7

99.12%

97.42%

98.33%

95.86%

96.05%

91.82%

94.62%

90.59%

You'll see that for certain numbers of dice and goal numbers to reach, the probability of curing the disease can be quite different. For example, with 3 dice and a goal of 13 the probabilities range from 7.41% to 23.15%. Most differences are <10%, but that can be a fairly significant difference.

You'll see that no die is universally easier or harder to find cures with. Getting 13+ is only really possible once you have 4 dice. A goal of 11 isn't very likely until you have at least 3 dice, and even then the odds are very bad. It's very hard for a single character other than maybe the generalist to amass 4 or more dice by themselves. After you have 3 dice bottled up you only have two dice left. So getting the 1 in 6 result of being able to bottle up on your dice when you only have two dice is fairly unlikely. The game allows you to trade your bottled up dice to another player if you're on the same square. This probability table tells me that that's a very important part of the game.

Advanced discussion:
In the above two tables, I ordered the dice colors by their standard deviations, lower on the left and higher on the right. One thing you might notice is that for 3 dice, the higher variance dice (aka higher standard deviation) have a higher probability of success. You'll notice that for higher numbers of dice, the colors with a lower standard deviation tend to have a higher chance of success.

When you have 3 dice, the average value of the sum is 9 (because the average for any given die is 3). Nine is insufficient for either goal so results near the average are bad. So you want a result that's far from the average, meaning you want a higher standard deviation. When you're at 5+ dice, the average result, 15, is above the goal so lower standard deviations are better.

When average is bad and you want that extreme result, you'll do better with a higher standard deviation. When the average is good and you don't need an extreme result, you'll do better with a lower standard deviation.

Player Dice, showing all faces

Epidemic Roll Change
Another place where probability plays a big role (roll?) is with epidemics. Each character die has one face which, when rolled, will advance the epidemic track. The generalist, with their seven dice instead of the normal 5, stands a much greater chance of rolling these values on their turn. To balance this, the generalist is allowed to ignore the effect of the first epidemic they roll each turn. This has a huge effect, and it makes the generalist have an overall lower change of advancing the epidemic track than other characters. Below is a table of probabilities for how far each character will advance the epidemic track on their initial roll of dice (with full dice i.e. no dice locked up from bottling up diseases).

Advancement

Normal

Generalist

0

40.19%

66.98%

1

40.19%

23.44%

2

16.08%

7.81%

3

3.22%

1.56%

4

0.32%

0.19%

5

0.01%

0.01%

6

NA

0.0004%

Avg

0.83

0.45

The other advantage of being the generalist is that when you have no epidemics on your initial roll (28% of the time w/ 7 dice, higher w/ fewer) you can freely reroll dice to try and get a better result w/ no fear of the consequences of rolling an epidemic.

Wednesday, January 7, 2015

Here are some thoughts I had the other day about F2P game design as "loops" versus the common analytical tool of a "funnel" and how the design goals of these games collide against the business decision of being F2P. For more ideas of what a "core loop" is, a Google Image search will give you lots of examples.

Sunday, January 4, 2015

This post is sort of a combination of a lot of things that have been bouncing around in my head for a while.

I kinda work in the games industry. It's weird. The company I work for definitely makes games. We released several this year. But we make F2P/social games so I feel completely disconnected from the types of games that I like to play. A lot of my coworkers aren't really gamers. We don't really talk about games at lunch or when we talk about our weekends.

I don't know if working at other F2P/social game developers feels like this.

Gaming news sites don't write about our types of games, except for the rare one that penetrates into the public eye: Candy Crash, Clash of Clans, Kim Kardashian: Hollywood, Farmville, Words with Friends.

I play all of our games, at least to try them out. I've really enjoyed several of them. I'm even spent money in a couple of them with no regrets. These are definitely games, but they're different. They're not a subtype of "traditional" but more like a newly discovered relative.

When G****gate flared up, nobody wanted us to take a stand. Nobody at work even talked about it. Only one person who I talked to about it had even heard of it.

Granted, we aren't really part of gaming culture. We're part of startup/tech culture. That's where we're located; that's who we recruit from; it's where people leave us to go. Our products live on the same platforms. We do the same analyses. By the same token the core group that influence the direction our games go, product managers (not designers), tend to come not from game design backgrounds, but business and finance. They come up with the features that go into the game and define how they should work. But they've never designed games before, never studied it at all.

We make games, but we aren't much of a gaming company.

Businesses include "goodwill" on their balance sheet sometimes. This reflects that there's more to a business than just their asset. That a brand has value. That's because a brand name can be exploited for monetary gains. Designing F2P games feels like managing "goodwill" at a personal level. Endear the player to the game enough that when the moment of pinch occurs (when the player's assets are not enough to overcome whatever challenge they face) that they will be sufficiently invested in the game to justify spending money on the game. Nobody likes spending money at these moments but, if you play it right, they will.

It's psychological manipulation as a business model. These aren't objects of art, dealing out enriching experiences. They can be fun but they aren't what I want to make.

When GDC rolls around, despite it being nearby I feel no compulsion to go. The talks there aren't for our games. They particularly aren't for me. My job isn't really one that exists in traditional gaming. I'm a data analyst. I don't design or code. I pull data from our databases to make sure the game is performing well and to investigate our user behavior. There's little need for my job when game development means putting a game out there and then mostly moving onto the next one. Our games live for a long time, we need to know how they're doing so we can make changes to make them better. To get more installs. To get more money from our players. I do good work. I'm always trying to figure out how to write better SQL, how to make better, more informative reports, how to make more productive insights. I'm proud of my work.

I've been thinking a lot about the upcoming year and I don't want to live in the Bay Area anymore. I like working where I do. I love working with the people I do. I love doing my work. If I could do my job but live anywhere I wanted to, I would in a heartbeat. I don't know where I would choose to move though. The Bay Area is just too big for our tastes, and it just doesn't work. We have to live too far away from where we work and still end up paying too much in rent to be able to save enough money to buy a house someday. And rent prices seems to be going up too fast for raises/promotions to make much of a difference.

But the one big goal for 2015 is to get the heck out of here. Whatever that takes. It's not somewhere practical to live the for a long time so we may as well get out of here now.

Wednesday, December 31, 2014

ThreesEpisode 5 of five out of ten magazine features an essay by Brendan Keogh about games exactly like Threes. About how these deeply systemic game are hard to talk. Graphics, story, sound, and some elements of gameplay are easy to talk about, but systems are harder. Threes is kinda like Tetris in that new tiles are always entering the board and you have to figure out how to combine them to make more room. In Threes there are things you have control over (how you're going to shift and combine tiles) and things you don't have control over (what tile is coming up next and where it enters). You're given enough knowledge about what tile is coming next and where it can enter that you can make intelligent decisions about what to do.

It's the things that you don't have control over that make the things you do have control over fun and interesting. Threes is a focused example of how random effects, information, and choice mix together to make an amazing gameplay experience.

I reached my pinnacle in this game in October by getting a 3072 tile on my board. I've done it a couple more times since then but I highly doubt I'll ever do better. But I keep playing.

FTL: Faster than Light
FTL came out in 2012, but it received a significant update this year, which is when I really fell for it. FTL is a roguelike, which is an utterly useless descriptor, unless you're familiar with the game Rogue, in which case it still doesn't tell you anything about the game. Roguelikes are games that have a relatively short duration but make up for that by using random generation to create replayability. Roguelikes must have a definite end goal and be hard. Failure must be an reasonably possible outcome.

FTL has you controlling a spaceship and it's crew, racing to alert the Federation of the oncoming rebel threat, like a reverse Star Wars. As you play you'll defeat enemy ships and get scrap and other material which you use to upgrade your ship. FTL asks you to overcome increasingly difficult enemies by figuring out where best to spend your scrap to complement your ships current build and the enemies your facing. Every run through FTL feels different even if you're using the same ship (of which there are 29).

Hearthstone
I love Hearthstone. In particular I love Hearthstone Arena. I love it for all the same reasons I love the above two game. Hearthstone Arena asks you to construct a deck out of randomly selected cards that are presented to you three at a time to use against other people who have similarly constructed a deck. Hearthstone arena is great because you don't have to buy the cards to use in it. You don't even have to pay to enter unless you don't have enough gold, which brings me to my second point.

Hearthstone's daily quest system is perfect. You get a quest every day, you can save up to three daily quests, and every day you can reroll one of your quests. If you want to play casually you can reroll quests to try and get quests that can be completed at the same time. If you want to be hardcore and try to get the most coins possible from quests you just reroll your 40 gold quests to try and get 60 gold quests. They challenge you to try new classes but offer you enough flexibility to avoid them if you want.

PT
If the above games are about choice granting you power and control to face randomly generated adversity, then PT is the opposite of that. It's not random. You have no power. PT is the scariest fucking shit I've ever played and it's free if you have a PS4. You're stuck in a hallway with no way to fight what haunts you. You can escape, but you have to figure out how, and it's not easy. PT is like nothing I've ever played before.

Goat of the Year 2014

Escape Goat 2
I know that Goat Simulator got more attention for it's title, wacky gameplay, and satirical bent but I enjoyed this game far more. Platformers are one of my favorite categories of games. Puzzles too. Puzzle platformers tend to fall flat but Escape Goat 2 manages it perfectly. It stays fresh and fun throughout without becoming impossibly obtuse, which is what generally happens with puzzle games. It has charming graphics and sound. It has a goat and a mouse. There's one puzzle that comes to mind that was really just too hard, but I was able to look up a solution fortunately. I don't really have too much to say about this game really. It's just a really solid game that deserves more attention than it got.

Desert Golfing
Desert FUCKING Golfing. Desert Golfing is an incredibly simple game. It doesn't integrate with facebook or twitter. There are no in-app purchases. Contrary to mobile game best practices, it costs $1.99 to download. There's no daily bonus that begs me to log back in. Its feels like a rebellion against F2P and social gaming. It's the complete opposite of current trends.

Monday, October 20, 2014

Happy 20th anniversary of the English language version of Final Fantasy 6!
— Alexa Ray Corriea (@AlexaRayC) October 20, 2014

I was 8 years old at the time, but I can't for the life of me remember when I actually got the game. I don't remember a lot of things, it turns out. I do, however, remember playing the game quite a bit. To say that Final Fantasy VI is a big part of development as a gamer would be an understatement. It, EarthBound, Chrono Trigger, Secret of Mana, and Illusion of Gaia combined to form a quintet of RPGs that were and are very important to me to this day.

FF6 struck me with it's story and character, filled with twists and turns, a large cast of interesting characters, and brilliant villains. I loved the characters so much that I used to pretend that I was a member of their team, hanging out with them on board the Blackjack or the Falcon. Part of that was because I was a fairly solitary kid. I didn't have very many friends, nor did I hang out with them very much outside of school. It's not that I was a reject, I just didn't try to make friends or try to hang out with them. I was very happy in my world and in the worlds of the games that I played. I suppose I was also pretty publicly a nerd, and I didn't really know how to talk to people, and I had trouble making eye contact, but I was doing alright by it.

I think part of the reason the characters are so strong is because you meet them in the World of Balance, regain them in the World of Ruin and find out how they react to this disaster, and then dive into their past and history in their optional sidequest. I miss sidequests, I think they're really important to developing the game world's story.

My brother and I both played FF6 a lot, even together. We watched each other play and offered tips. We didn't play too many video games together once we got much older. We drifted apart, he got his own room, we stopped playing as many games together. Eventually he'd start misbehaving, doing drugs, causing trouble, and making family life difficult. Things have gotten better but we're still distant and I still reminisce about those old days when we'd play together.

I played Final Fantasy VI over and over all the way up and through junior high, periodically dipping back into the game for nostalgia trips when I felt I needed them. I moved on to other things in high school, when we got a PlayStation 2 and FF9, FFX, and Kingdom Hearts were the RPGs that I played. When art went off to college and wanted to take the SNES with him, I obliged. When he dropped out after a semester and moved back home. A lot of the SNES games didn't come back, particularly the RPGs that I loved, that we had bonded over. When I questioned him about where they had gone, he said that he had loaned them to people and hadn't got them back. I pressed him about getting them back, but he always pushed it off. I not think that he probably sold them. I can only imagine what he did with the money. I've never really talked with him about this. We don't ever talk about that time in our family's life.

I almost always played with Sabin and Edgar in my party. I don't know if it's because they're strong or because I just wanted to see brothers that were distant yet loved each other.

I started playing piano in 5th grade and my former kindergarten teacher was my first instructor. I took lessons all the way through high school. For a brief period I took lessons from a jazz piano instructor. Once while there for a lesson I saw a book of piano music that belonged to one of her students. It was a collection of sheet music for FF6's soundtrack. I asked begged her to ask her student where he got the music and when she found out and told me, I ordered a copy immediately. Once I started college I didn't do a good job of staying in practice. Pretty much the only music I would keep playing was music from my FF6 collection and a collection of songs from across all the Final Fantasy games.

The music of FF6 is very deeply ingrained in me. Sometimes I feel that the way that I can best express emotion is by playing its music on the piano. I've purchased it's soundtrack in various forms and arrangements time and time again. It takes me back in time, helps me remember, reminds me of friends I haven't spoken to in a long time. It takes me back to when I was playing the game growing up. FF6 is so important to me. It's hard to say that my life would be different had it never existed, but as it stands I find it hard to imagine it'd be the same.